HomeMy WebLinkAbout1957-02-20198
FCh~_~?y 20~ 1957 - Con~o
The ~ questioned if anyone was in faver of this petition, and
Attorney Jahn NcNiff spoke in behalf of a group of merchants who have places
cf business on Main Street, residents and taxpayers. "Speaking on re-zening
First and Seccad Streets, it seems it should be obvious to all that the people
of the To~m have settled the point that the development cf the business area
in North Am/over should be in the future in the present b~siness zone." He
· pointed out that it would bring more business to the other ~merchants, and was
therefore in favor of this particular applicatien.
Mr. Kittredge, one ef the applicants, stated that the plens of a future
business development are subject to a great deal more study.
The Ch=t~man asked if anyone was against the petition. No one answered.
Y~. Barman moved that the matter be taken u~/er advisement. Mr.,~ Osgoed
seconded ~ motien. It was unanimously carried by the Beard.
Due to the large attendance pert~tn~ug to the petition of Charles W.
Trembly, amd ethers to pe~it the change in classificatien of land free Country
Residence District, Rural Residence District and Agricultural District te
General Business pert~ing to the Fair land on Chickering Read, a m~tien was
made to adjo~.rn this l~earing to the High School Aadito~
The Secretary read the legal notice to all present.
The C~m~U ask~i if anyone were in laver of the aPPlication. Mr. Charles
Trembly, petitioner, stated that he aPPeared for the Elm Far~ Food ~, He
further said the land is owned by Mr. Roy R. Far~ which is located on Chickering
Road opposite the Hi-spo% Rest~ua~aut, and that the Elm Farm has an o~ticn ~
purchase the land. He brought ont that this was ~he locus advised by our planning
consultant for business use. Two sketches were mhew~ of the proposed supermarket
of which the estimated cost to construct would be $300~000. The building would
he erected a distance free the street line so as te have sufficient parking space.
He pointed out that there are public utilities at present on Chickerdng Road, and
when the proposed buildtug is constructed, ~m Farm will have to pa~ fer Connecting
to the Town water and sewe~ lines. Ne further said that because there are no storm
dr~tm~ mx Chickering Road and becanse of the topography of the land, ~lm Farm
h&v~ ~dispds~ ~ surface water by making, a leaching field. ~lm Farm will alee
hire and pay at their u~A expense for any policing.
Mr. Colby Burbank, Engineer, stated that the proposed supermarket will use
the equivalent of not more than t~o dwellings concerning the water situation.
Mr. Trcmbly brought out that it would not cost the Town anything, the T~,
would also benefit in taxes, and lastly the supermarket is a necessity to the
people of North Andover. Mr. B~rbank displa~ a plan of a lot la~-ont of the
proposed structure. The supermarket would be set back free 375 to 400 feet from
the bou~iary of Chickering Road. The parking space and building will go ba~k
appromimately 600 feet. The 1200 feet of back land will still belong to Mr. Fart.
The Cb~man queStioned if anyone else were in favor of the petition. There
was no reply. The Chairman then ashed if anyone were against the petition. Atty.
Arnold H. Salisbury, spoF, e in behalf of alrat-~ers, o,utea's and Nfs. John (S. Coolidge.
Atty. Salisbury based his disapproval cf the petition on the fallowing rease~s:
1:99
June at a Speefuzl T~n Meeting, the ci~ems voted against mS' Fr~posed
bust~essas in the s~m~ ~rea. We mhould have ~n opportunity $e see h~ NorTh
And~ver rsac%s t~ m~ supsrmerket, and lastly n~ ~e wants t~ see C~d=~ amad
t~-med into anc~her Rc~te ~2§." Therefore he is against favoring this applicaticm~
Attormey McNiff took the floc~ and spo~$ in beh=?* e~ a group of residents
who live em Massachusetts Avemne amd Ohickering Road and other a~as in'the
immediate ~icinity amd a group ~f merchants whe are now in business in Nor~
Andover. He stated the people do not want ar~ m~re business c~ ~hiekeriug Road.
He further said ~he people want to keep Chickering Road in a residential character.
He stated that ~n December 15, 1955, David & Do~ls Rennie, Jr. ec~eye~ las~ to
Roy R. Fart, developer. He further said that even before Mr. Fart acquired title
c~ sd~nd~, plans developing the area for residential lets were made. The pleas
were dated N~vember 3, 1955, _a~d approved Dacembe~ 22, 1955 fo~ 73 residential
lots. This plan was no~ rec~ until March 8, 1956. He further stated that ~
June 29, 1956, o~_e da~ befere the Special T~. Meeting, Mr. Fawr conveyed 27 af
· the 73 lots to his wife, Doris Fart, amd also e~ the same da~ cenveyed 16 lo~s to
Edna Far~, Graniteville, Vermont. He stated, Mr. Farr cenveyed these lots in
such a way that there ,e-told be three people owning these lots, and net ~e perse~
weald own two lots that were adjacent. Mr. MeN,fl pointed eut that Elm Farm has a
place of business in Tewksbury which .is plain and fanctienal, the back of the
building has ether th~ngs that are not attractive to +,he eye. He was in laver af
denying the petition.
M~. Barman made a motic~ that in the future all spe_~ers w~]l be given a
mamimam of tsn minutes. Mr. Finck seceded this motien. It was unanimously carried.
Mr. Dewey Dye~ took the floor and stated he was favoring the petitim c~
~ H. McAloon, Francis B. Eitt~edge and others. Er. Dyer questioned if any c~e
supermarket were n~med in ec~nec~iem with th~s petition. Mr. Kittredge answered
there were ne ccmmit~ with am~ supermarket as yet. Mr. Dyer questi~d if the
Fart la~t were developed into he~ses ~d there were appro~tel7 1~ cktldren in
the'area proposed, would it place an additional stun e~ the present schoel sy~&sm~
Mr. Tractably answered the~e would be need for a new school.
Those that were ,~'~'~-+., ~ petition mf Mr. Trcmbly and othea?: Mrs. MeQuesten,
Mr. Mneller - (Mr. Maeller stated he is in favor ef ~he first petitic~ concexr~tn__g
the d,w~t,~ business area.)
Mr. Trc~bly at $2zis point, stated he did not wish to go into rebuttals but
there were people Present in favor of the petitiC~o
Mr. DtFrus¢io, Peters Street, was ag~t the petitien statdng the traffic at
the present was overwh~lmi~g without adding to it.
There was a show of hands approving and disapproving the petition.
Mr. Bennan made a motion, seconded by Mr. Osgood that the petition be taken
under advisement. It '~as unanimously car~led.
Next cn the agenda was varieus insertions and correcti~s of the rewtsed
B -zaw.
Secretary Osgood read ~be first article. There was no ~cussic~.
2OO
Feb~m,y 2~, ~ - Cc~t.
Second Article; Hrs. McSesten stated that sectic~ 3.53 was acted upon amd
~-,~ndad in June~ 19~6. It was unanimously ~toptad. She stated the B~smd was
brt~ back an amendmsnt to her amir, and would like a thc~ undem-
standing uf what is zc~ad residential and il~dustrial.
Mr, Osgood stated that in June uf 1956 'there was discussic~ of
McQuesten~s property az~ there were no exa~t bounds f~r hew residential area
projecting into an industrial area. Mrs. McQuesten, s property runs adjacent
Davis & Fufoe~ where they cure castings. Hr. 0sgood related that no
right to rez~e something they do n~t ~ Mr. 0sgood stated the ar%icle as
appears in ~he published hearing notice is in exT~r, a~d that a ~ des~riptte~
was written pertaining t~ Mrs. Mc~aesten~s land.
Articles 3, 4, 5 and 6 were read, and there ~-as no c~ant.
At the ccaclusi~ of the reading of the seventh article, there were a numbe~
of people opposing it. The seventh article was to amend the Z~ning By-Law by
~ under paragraph 3.6 Neighborhood Basi~s Districts, a new paragraph
nvmbered 3.64 and transferring thereto ~ ~bering cc~secutively (1) ?~rough
(13), etc.
There was oppositic~ to Far$'s Diner being put in a Neighborhood Business
District and the general feeling was that it should be put into a Business District.
Attorney Ourcio took the floor and stated he was representing the Lak~
G~r,.age and Mr. S~ c~ Ohickering Road. He stated that the matte~ has
already bee~ g~ne into before~ and zoning businesses into Neighborhood ~_stricts
is a discrfminatic~. He asked that the B~ard ccusid~~ with~ this pa~inu~
Article from the Warrant. Mr. Bulgor a~,,o opposed classifying his animal hospital
as a Nei~rhood Business.
~. Dyer stated that a vote should be taken to strik~ Sectic~ G (Article ?)
the wa~Tant. A vote of hamds was taken, a~ were in favor,
Due to the citizens not sta~ to hear the remaining 6 a~tieles, they were
not read,
The mes+A~g adjourned at 11:15
E. A. Balzius Clerk